Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

I think saying ".CA don't care about multiplayer" is a bit dramatic and untruthful.

You should design your own game. It would be perfect, for you

never mind those of us who greifed the patch 15 patch, never mind those of us who can see that shogun is a superior game, never mind that the menu doesn't even at 1 point mention "multiplayer" but that it is sub-menus and classified under terms as "quickbattle" and "battle list" hell i wouldn't be suprised if 70% dont even know the game has multiplayer, where in shogun it was obvius from the get go, it only had 2 main menus "single player" and "multiplayer".
just accept this game and esp. this patch was made for singleplayers who don't know micro of a pro from that of a noob, and that counts both for battle and campaign (trust me, no legendary campaign is ever the same as vs a human).

He's absolutely right though. It is blatantly obvious that CA do not care about MP from the way they barely devoted any attention to it.

Honestly, how can you mean that?

When I get online I see more people playing R2 weeks after patch 15. All other patches have had a temporary spike in #s then tremendous drop off of participation. It looks like many more folks like this patch, and they're proving it by playing it more often. If CA cared less about MP, what explains this?

The game is fun ATM. Much more fun and balanced than before. I think jonas is still upset by the increased time it takes to have a battle. Hell I think that alone is its greatest improvement. No more "overly rehearsed 4 minute rush ****" the battles now are 10 -15 minutes, it's awesome. The worst complaints now other than the increased time are chariots and we've been down that road before. I just dont understand the drama, Im sure CA has plenty of interest in MP or they wouldnt be working on MP arena.

BTW, how is it blatantly obvious? What exactly has not improved in MP from it's release? What was better about MP at release?

never mind those of us who greifed the patch 15 patch, never mind those of us who can see that shogun is a superior game, never mind that the menu doesn't even at 1 point mention "multiplayer" but that it is sub-menus and classified under terms as "quickbattle" and "battle list" hell i wouldn't be suprised if 70% dont even know the game has multiplayer, where in shogun it was obvius from the get go, it only had 2 main menus "single player" and "multiplayer".
just accept this game and esp. this patch was made for singleplayers who don't know micro of a pro from that of a noob, and that counts both for battle and campaign (trust me, no legendary campaign is ever the same as vs a human).

This is all you can come up with?

I too dislike single player, it makes no sense to me to play hour after hour against a computer, no sense at all. No challenge at all, sooner or later you figure it out, where's the fun/challenge in that? With that said.........................
I never play single player, campaign, historical battle, custom battle or anything against the AI, never. Yet I find R2 MP very fun, and very close to just right.

Ever think that you just invest too much time and energy in a game? Scrutinizing every tiny detail that 99% of everyone else never notices. My god it must be terrible for you.

Just play the game, or MOD it to how youd like it to be then get your overly interested and obsessed friends together and have a blast. Do something other than complain and make unrealistic, or at least unsubstantiated claims.

When I get online I see more people playing R2 weeks after patch 15. All other patches have had a temporary spike in #s then tremendous drop off of participation. It looks like many more folks like this patch, and they're proving it by playing it more often. If CA cared less about MP, what explains this?

I'm struggling to see the logic behind this one. An increase in players on a predominantly SP game tells us nothing about the attitude of the game's developers towards its MP component.

Because, had CA wanted to create a thriving MP, they would have devoted far more attention to it and would have implemented some basic features which are conducive to making an MP game successful. I honestly can't be bothered going into a list of all that's wrong with the game, but believe me as an RTW MP veteran when I say R2 MP would have been so much better, on a competitive level but also in terms of accessibility/ease of use, replayability and general fun, if CA had really cared about making it a success.

What exactly has not improved in MP from it's release? What was better about MP at release?

I never said that MP hadn't improved since release. But if CA truly cared about the game, it wouldn't have had so many and such glaring issues on day 1, and it wouldn't have taken so long to patch them out. Furthermore, they wouldn't have introduced new problems into the game, such as OP eles and chariots, which basic testing could have flagged up as an issue, in subsequent patches.

Admin on Total War Hub, the new home of the Rome: Total War Multiplayer community.

hello.
i want to ask if the users with mac rtw2 can play online battles with windows rtw2 players. i go in online multiplayer and i do not see other players!!!

Hi AYTOKRATOR.

Yeah sadly as you've been told we mac players can't play online with the pc players. Not sure if I'm allowed to post links to groups on here (got it removed on another forum) but I thought I'd try and help out.

This group here is a mac Rome 2 group, it started about a week ago and we've grown to nearly 30 members which has meant we've got regular mp battles and campaigns going. Join the group and let the mac community thrive!